Canucks Management & Ownership Discussion | Part 25

[Toxic0n]

Consider the factors for the Kesler trade:

....
(2) The owner wanting to make the playoffs the next year and
....
(4) Gillis being stubborn and not trading Kesler for the prior season, may have soured the other GMs.

#2 is an excuse for Benning because the owners meddled.
#4 is somehow Gillis' fault even though the owners meddled.


NICE

 

[Knight53]

Just curious how the board feels about Chris Krieder.

and how would you react if the Canucks Traded there 2017 1st round pick to get him

Good way to kill the season for many. After the 2016 draft my mind's only been on the 2017 draft don't care about anything else, but do fear the neanderthal will trade the pick in an attempt to save his ass.

 

[iloveloov*]

Kreider plays similar to Virtanen but that doesn't make him redundant. We still need more guys who play like him on the roster. I would trade next year's 2nd round pick for him if we still have it.

 

[The Extrapolater]

Just curious how the board feels about Chris Krieder.

and how would you react if the Canucks Traded there 2017 1st round pick to get him

Oh wow, that's awful. Canucks will be competing for the 1st overall draft pick this coming season. Chris Kreider is not worth a top five pick. He's a decent winger, but not someone you give up anything of value for.

 

[VanillaCoke]

I'd trade 2018 1st for kreider easily

 

[iloveloov*]

I'd trade 2018 1st for kreider easily

What about a top-16 protected 2017 1st (if the Canucks miss the playoff it becomes a 2018 1st)? Seems fair to me.

 

[y2kcanucks]

What about a top-16 protected 2017 1st (if the Canucks miss the playoff it becomes a 2018 1st)? Seems fair to me.

Absolutely not.

Chris Kreider isn't worth a 1st round pick.

This is going to be a bad team going into the 2018 draft too, with what Benning has done to it.

 

[Knight53]

2018 is a much better draft than 2017 with an Eichel level prospect in Jake Wise up for grabs. Trading any first round picks with the Sedins getting older with no replacements in sight would be just out of this world stupid.

Also hate how we have the worst GM in trading but is also one of the most active. Worse combination. Expect 3-4 dumb trades a year with his 4th dumb trade this year coming before training camp where more picks are traded to fulfill his fetish of garbage age gap players.

 

[mathonwy]

Absolutely not.

Chris Kreider isn't worth a 1st round pick.

This is going to be a bad team going into the 2018 draft too, with what Benning has done to it.

He is.... just not to us. If he were a RW it would be a different story.

Could probably make

Sedin-Sedin-Kreider
Burr-Sutter-Eriksson

work

 

[PM]

We are not a top-6 forward away from the playoffs. We have a very shallow defense whose best players are also relatively injury prone. This is how I see it playing out if we go this route:

1) Trade 1st rounder for Kreider

2) Edler and/or Tanev get injured

3) Sbisa into the top-4

4) Finish in the bottom-5

5) NYR get a top-5 pick

6) Extreme unhappiness in Vancouver

 

[Hit the post]

He is.... just not to us. If he were a RW it would be a different story.

Could probably make

Sedin-Sedin-Kreider
Burr-Sutter-Eriksson

work

That would be an awful 2nd line considering the cost required to get Kreider & a waste of Eriksson's abilities (considering the big contract he just got).

 

[NoShowWilly]

we shouldn't be moving a first for another 3-4 years.

 

[mathonwy]

That would be an awful 2nd line considering the cost required to get Kreider & a waste of Eriksson's abilities (considering the big contract he just got).

I think using the word 'awful' is a bit strong.

Eriksson is part goal scorer and part playmaker and potentially could compensate for Sutter's lack of playmaking ability to make the line work.

As well, both Burr and Eriksson are pretty smart hockey players that are very good at adapting.

It's a pointless conversation though as Kreider is a LW.

But I wouldn't call it an "awful 2nd line.".

 

[RandV]

Absolutely not.

Chris Kreider isn't worth a 1st round pick.

This is going to be a bad team going into the 2018 draft too, with what Benning has done to it.

Sure he is... if you're a top 12 team.

 

[Hit the post]

I think using the word 'awful' is a bit strong.

Eriksson is part goal scorer and part playmaker and potentially could compensate for Sutter's lack of playmaking ability to make the line work.

As well, both Burr and Eriksson are pretty smart hockey players that are very good at adapting.

It's a pointless conversation though as Kreider is a LW.

But I wouldn't call it an "awful 2nd line.".

Sutter hasn't gotten even 40 points in how long? He's not a proven top six forward. Burrows is still useful defensively but his days as a top six foward are probably behind him. Eriksson is solid; but not that good to carry a line.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[SgtToody]

That would be an awful 2nd line considering the cost required to get Kreider & a waste of Eriksson's abilities (considering the big contract he just got).

But tell me honestly you don't think its crossed Willie's mind...

 

[mathonwy]

Sutter hasn't gotten even 40 points in how long? He's not a proven top six forward. Burrows is still useful defensively but his days as a top six foward are probably behind him. Eriksson is solid; but not that good to carry a line.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

I don't want to agree to disagree!!!

j/k

From what I saw from Sutter last season, I think he's a circumstantial top 6 player. IE, he's got to be in the right circumstances, playing with the right type of players to be a top 6 player.

Offensively speaking, Sutter doesn't make his line mates better. He's not very good at being the general in the O zone and would rather be the follower. When WD put him with the Sedins last season, Sutter looked quite comfortable with Hank being the O zone QB.

Defensively speaking, Sutter's speed and size makes him a very effective defender. He hustles back and has pretty good instincts in terms of D coverage.

So he's a bad C in the O zone and a good C in the D zone which would explain his low point totals.

I'm postulating that if we can play Sutter with forward winger that is good at quarterbacking the offense, Sutter can be an effective top 6 forward as he shields the puck quite well with his size, he's good along the walls, he handles the puck like a top 6 forward and he's got speed.

Maybe between Burr and Eriksson that could happen? I don't know. I haven't watched enough of Eriksson to see what his o-zone style of play is and whether he can control and drive play.

 

[DL44]

This is like... a very long thread....

 

[NoShowWilly]

This is like... a very long thread....

the mods have given up on us.

 

[DL44]

the mods have given up on us.

Can't believe they aren't fans of redundant circle jerks.

 

[PG Canuck]

the mods have given up on us.

Bums, I tell ya.

New thread: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2119249